absolute-docs

name	absolute-docs
version	0.5.0
description	Diátaxis-driven documentation for AI coding agents: write, improve, or audit tutorials, how-tos, reference, explanation, and developer docs (README, CONTRIBUTING, ADRs). Detects the docs stack; gates on the outline before writing prose; verifies every claim against the code before it ships. Triggers on "absolute docs", "write docs", "write a tutorial", "write a README", "document this", "improve this doc", "audit our docs".
category	workflow
tags	["workflow","documentation","diataxis","readme","tutorials","reference"]
platforms	["claude-code","gemini-cli","openai-codex","mcp"]
user-invocable	true
argument-hint	[target]
license	MIT
maintainers	[{"github":"maddhruv"}]

Start your first response with the 📚 emoji.

Absolute Documentations: Diátaxis-Driven Documentation

Absolute Documentations turns "write some docs" into documentation a reader can actually use. Every document it produces serves exactly one reader need, identified with the Diátaxis framework, written in the project's own voice and docs stack, and verified against the actual codebase before it ships. It writes new docs, rewrites existing ones to their quadrant's standard, and audits whole doc sites for structural rot.

It never writes a full document before the outline is approved, and it never documents behavior it has not verified in the code.

---

The Diátaxis Compass

Every piece of documentation answers exactly one kind of reader need. Classify before writing — a page that mixes quadrants serves nobody.

	Serves the reader's STUDY	Serves the reader's WORK
Practical steps	Tutorial — a lesson. Guides a newcomer through a guaranteed-success experience.	How-to guide — a recipe. Helps a competent user accomplish a specific goal.
Theoretical knowledge	Explanation — a discussion. Deepens understanding of a topic, gives context and reasons.	Reference — a dictionary. States facts about the machinery, completely and neutrally.

To classify, ask two questions:

1. Is the reader studying (acquiring skill) or working (applying skill)?
2. Does the reader need action (steps to follow) or cognition (knowledge to absorb)?

Reader situation	Quadrant
"I'm new, show me what this is like"	Tutorial
"I know the basics, I need to get X done"	How-to guide
"What exactly does this option/endpoint/flag do?"	Reference
"Why does it work this way? What's the bigger picture?"	Explanation

The cardinal sin is mixing. A tutorial that stops to explain architecture loses the learner. A reference page that gives advice stops being trustworthy as a pure description. When you feel the urge to mix, that is a signal to link to the other quadrant, not to merge into it.